The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Community => Topic started by: SkepticOfAll on June 26, 2017, 04:39:25 AM
-
I recently started searching about FE, and i am truly in doubt. I have not seen 1 not 1 real picture of earth from out of space, explain that to me? All pictures are CGI(computer generated) stated by NASA themselves, look it up. If that doesn't scream fishy i don't know what does, there isn't 1 real picture of the earth, planets, the moon, or the sun; absolutely nothing. It simply doesn't exist, and we are in the year 2017. How is this even possible? How is no one asking NASA this question?
-
I recently started searching about FE, and i am truly in doubt. I have not seen 1 not 1 real picture of earth from out of space, explain that to me? All pictures are CGI(computer generated) stated by NASA themselves, look it up. If that doesn't scream fishy i don't know what does, there isn't 1 real picture of the earth, planets, the moon, or the sun; absolutely nothing. It simply doesn't exist, and we are in the year 2017. How is this even possible? How is no one asking NASA this question?
NASA never said their images were computer generated. They are composite images...a completely different thing. The reason MOST pictures are composite images is that they are taken from only 300 miles away and that is not far enough to zoom out and see the whole planet at once.
There are several pictures of the whole planet that are not composite images, nor computer generated. The CGI excuse is just something the FES came up with once we had the technology to produce photo evidence.
You don't need a picture of the earth to prove it is a sphere, there are endless other facts you can observe for yourself.
It is not rational to dismiss the facts and evidence that prove a spherical earth, and then believe in a conspiracy theory in which there is zero actual evidence or facts that support it.
-
This is an unedited picture of Earth from the moon
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5729/21081957053_19ba49e90e_c.jpg)
-
This is an unedited picture of Earth from the moon
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5729/21081957053_19ba49e90e_c.jpg)
False, that picture was debunked as CGI. There hasn't been 1 picture of the earth that isn't computer generated.
-
I recently started searching about FE, and i am truly in doubt. I have not seen 1 not 1 real picture of earth from out of space, explain that to me? All pictures are CGI(computer generated) stated by NASA themselves, look it up. If that doesn't scream fishy i don't know what does, there isn't 1 real picture of the earth, planets, the moon, or the sun; absolutely nothing. It simply doesn't exist, and we are in the year 2017. How is this even possible? How is no one asking NASA this question?
NASA never said their images were computer generated. They are composite images...a completely different thing. The reason MOST pictures are composite images is that they are taken from only 300 miles away and that is not far enough to zoom out and see the whole planet at once.
There are several pictures of the whole planet that are not composite images, nor computer generated. The CGI excuse is just something the FES came up with once we had the technology to produce photo evidence.
You don't need a picture of the earth to prove it is a sphere, there are endless other facts you can observe for yourself.
It is not rational to dismiss the facts and evidence that prove a spherical earth, and then believe in a conspiracy theory in which there is zero actual evidence or facts that support it.
I can get multiple sources right now, that shows NASA tampered with earth images(photoshopped them) and also made CGI earth pictures. You're telling me NASA a 20 billion dollar government facility can't get one decent picture from outer space? Yea right.
-
This is an unedited picture of Earth from the moon
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5729/21081957053_19ba49e90e_c.jpg)
False, that picture was debunked as CGI. There hasn't been 1 picture of the earth that isn't computer generated.
The only people who have "debunked" these photos are flat earthers that would debunk a trip to space if they saw it for themselves.
You can just watch the live feed from the ISS if you want. But I am guessing that has somehow been debunked as fake also.... Pitty you are too closed minded to realize how closed minded you are.
Even if you claim all of NASA's information is false, there is still endless evidence that destroys flat earth theory.
-
False, that picture was debunked as CGI. There hasn't been 1 picture of the earth that isn't computer generated.
That photo predates CGI by decades. It was published at the time, in the era during which it was taken.
Here's one taken in 1966, well before the CGI era:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d6/First_View_of_Earth_from_Moon_-_reprocessed_wide.jpg/1920px-First_View_of_Earth_from_Moon_-_reprocessed_wide.jpg)
Here's one taken by astronaut William Anders in 1968, during the Apollo 8 mission. Again, well before CGI was a thing:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a8/NASA-Apollo8-Dec24-Earthrise.jpg/1920px-NASA-Apollo8-Dec24-Earthrise.jpg)
Here's a detail of that one that the US Postal Service issued on a 1969 postage stamp.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6e/Scott_1371%2C_Apollo_8.jpg)
-
I recently started searching about FE, and i am truly in doubt. I have not seen 1 not 1 real picture of earth from out of space, explain that to me? All pictures are CGI(computer generated) stated by NASA themselves, look it up. If that doesn't scream fishy i don't know what does, there isn't 1 real picture of the earth, planets, the moon, or the sun; absolutely nothing. It simply doesn't exist, and we are in the year 2017. How is this even possible? How is no one asking NASA this question?
NASA never said their images were computer generated. They are composite images...a completely different thing. The reason MOST pictures are composite images is that they are taken from only 300 miles away and that is not far enough to zoom out and see the whole planet at once.
There are several pictures of the whole planet that are not composite images, nor computer generated. The CGI excuse is just something the FES came up with once we had the technology to produce photo evidence.
You don't need a picture of the earth to prove it is a sphere, there are endless other facts you can observe for yourself.
It is not rational to dismiss the facts and evidence that prove a spherical earth, and then believe in a conspiracy theory in which there is zero actual evidence or facts that support it.
Absolutely agree with this intervention. I assume that thanks to the fact that the photo taken by NASA satellite are composite it is easy to debunk that the cameras should take the pictures of the Earth with distortion, as each photo is composed by tiles which distortion is spread over the picture's total area
-
This is an unedited picture of Earth from the moon
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5729/21081957053_19ba49e90e_c.jpg)
False, that picture was debunked as CGI. There hasn't been 1 picture of the earth that isn't computer generated.
The only people who have "debunked" these photos are flat earthers that would debunk a trip to space if they saw it for themselves.
You can just watch the live feed from the ISS if you want. But I am guessing that has somehow been debunked as fake also.... Pitty you are too closed minded to realize how closed minded you are.
Even if you claim all of NASA's information is false, there is still endless evidence that destroys flat earth theory.
Debunked by whom? What reasoning did they use to prove these images to be fake?
-
I recently started searching about FE, and i am truly in doubt.
Thats great,
NASA are their own worst enemies, the fact that thousands of the early moon landing tapes conveniently were erased shows that NASA fears scrutiny. If anyone still believes that the moon landings actually happened, then they are living in "911 was done by terrorists" la la land, and thats exactly where NASA and the government want them.
Regardless of the shape of the earth, when Roundies start defending the undefendable without questioning any of the numerous air bubbles, cgi gaffes, and in 911's case, controlled demolition evidence, then its a sure sign that they are a part of the deception so be careful on here.
-
I recently started searching about FE, and i am truly in doubt.
Thats great,
NASA are their own worst enemies, the fact that thousands of the early moon landing tapes conveniently were erased shows that NASA fears scrutiny. If anyone still believes that the moon landings actually happened, then they are living in "911 was done by terrorists" la la land, and thats exactly where NASA and the government want them.
Regardless of the shape of the earth, when Roundies start defending the undefendable without questioning any of the numerous air bubbles, cgi gaffes, and in 911's case, controlled demolition evidence, then its a sure sign that they are a part of the deception so be careful on here.
Would you like to share some of your favorite evidence against NASA?
-
Dear Round Earthers:
It's really rather pointless arguing with FE'ers using photos taken by NASA.
They don't trust NASA. NASA (and the UN) are claimed to be in an enormous conspiracy.
So why bother. You can't debate a blanket "They're lying" claim...you just can't.
What makes FET fail - is things like the observations that any human can make for themselves, very easily, just looking at the Sun and Moon and spending a few minutes thinking carefully about what they see.
There is (as yet - that I've seen) no FET explanation whatever for the phases of the moon that actually works.
The Wiki says that the sun shines on the moon to make phases...just as in RET. Unfortunately, the Wiki also says that the sun casts a beam of light downwards onto the earth, like a flashlight...which means it can't illuminate the moon - which the Wiki tells us is at the same height as the Sun.
If it's noon in summer in Indonesia (so the sun is more or less vertically overhead) and at the same instant, the moon is more or less vertically overhead at roughly midnight on the opposite side of the planet, in Brazil - then (even ignoring the "cone of light" problem) the moon would have to be in 50% shadow...but what we ACTUALLY observe in that situation is that the moon is full.
The Wiki attempts to explain this by the moon and sun "exchanging altitude"...aside from the obvious issues of them having to change size due to perspective...for the moon to be full, when the sun is above a point 12,000 miles away - the moon would have to be (effectively) infinitely far away above the earth. If it were merely (say) twice it's normal 3,000 miles altitude - then it would be only just barely more than a half moon. If the moon were to move up to 12,000 miles above the earth, there would be an isocelese right-triangle with apoint 3,000 miles above Equador at the right angle and the sun and moon at the other two points...that would let the sun shine on the moon at a 45 degree angle...still not REMOTELY anything like a full moon. Put the moon out at 100,000 miles above the Earth, and now it might maybe look almost full...good enough maybe. But now the moon is 30 times further away than it "normally" is - and would look like a pin-prick in the sky instead of a big, round disk.
Other FE websites claim that the moon glows by the light of luminous creatures like fireflies that migrate over the surface over a period of a month, and this creates the moon phases (Yes! Really!) - yet others claim that the moon is projected onto the sky as a hologram...which doesn't really explain how people have talked about the moon and it's phases in documents going back thousands of years before holograms were invented...and doesn't explain how it is that this is possible given that holograms simply don't work like the do in StarWars.
Busted.
Add to that how the moon appears to be upside down in the southern hemisphere - and rotated 90 degrees (compared to, say North America or Europe).
Mr Bishop's ad-hoc explanation requires that the moon is a flat disk laying parallel to the surface of the earth - but then goes oddly quiet when it's pointed out that it would appear as a squashed ellipse from some places - and in any case, this doesn't explain what you see at the equator.
Busted.
Then ask about how lunar and solar eclipses work...in RET, you can see the curved shadow of the Earth laying onto the moon in a partial lunar eclipse. This can't happen in FET, so they magically add another object that somehow gets between Earth and Moon to cause this darkening. The Solar eclipse in FET ought to cause the moon to crash into the sun (it's claimed that they are at the same height - and they'd have to be to avoid having the moon cast inconveniently oddly shaped shadows)...so again, the mystery object intervenes between sun and earth. Because at the (RET) moment of totality, you can see 'beads' of sunlight shining through deep valleys in the moon - the FET mystery object would have to have valleys and mountains in the exact same places as the actual moon. But unfortunately, this explanation can't explain why solar eclipses are visible through such a narrow band of the Earth's surface.
Busted.
...it goes on and on. So forget the NASA faked photo/moon-landing stuff - yes, to any reasonable degree of belief, it's impossible for such a wide ranging conspiracy (across at least four space-going nations and half a dozen independent businesses - about a million amateur and professional astronomer, etc).
You can't argue with a "They are all lying to us to cover up the truth"...you just can't. So give up on this one.
There are MUCH easier ways to disprove all of the nonsense that said about FET. Things that the FE'ers cannot deny - which require them to simply ignore offending posts.
-
This is an unedited picture of Earth from the moon
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5729/21081957053_19ba49e90e_c.jpg)
False, that picture was debunked as CGI. There hasn't been 1 picture of the earth that isn't computer generated.
How? Because there are no stars in it? ::)
-
This is an unedited picture of Earth from the moon
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5729/21081957053_19ba49e90e_c.jpg)
False, that picture was debunked as CGI. There hasn't been 1 picture of the earth that isn't computer generated.
How? Because there are no stars in it? ::)
It is called exposure. Take a moment to look it up. This has only been explained (and can be proven) 50-100 million times.
Why can't you see stars during the day?
-
This is an unedited picture of Earth from the moon
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5729/21081957053_19ba49e90e_c.jpg)
False, that picture was debunked as CGI. There hasn't been 1 picture of the earth that isn't computer generated.
How? Because there are no stars in it? ::)
It is called exposure. Take a moment to look it up. This has only been explained (and can be proven) 50-100 million times.
Why can't you see stars during the day?
I'm fairly certain Skeptic was being sarcastic, hence the eye roll
-
"I have not seen 1 not 1 real picture of earth from out of space, explain that to me?"
Okay, here's the explanation, you suck at finding photos on the internet. Clear enough?
It took me a bit more than 4 minutes to come up with this: http://www.russianspaceweb.com/images/spacecraft/application/weather/elektro/earth_disk1_1.jpg
Russian space agency, Roscosmos, not NASA.
"... there isn't 1 real picture of the earth, planets, the moon, or the sun; absolutely nothing."
That's pretty extreme. Are you literally claiming that no one, in all of history, has ever taken a picture of the moon? I must augment my previous statement, you suck at understanding simple, everyday occurrences that no one else has any trouble with.
-
chipsullivan, are you sure that russian space agencies being sincere too?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ra1vTToMir4
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/images/spacecraft/application/weather/elektro/earth_disk1_1.jpg
The picture you've given is just a CGI rendering, obviously!
I've found two big channels dedicated to debunking Roscosmos/NASA/ISS:
TMStudio (https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=tm+studio+%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%81), Макс Беляев (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4S16PX0flDyyRN5qgLmp9KK8mF_V_YsO)
Watch one of the videos in the search results (https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=EgIIBVAU&q=%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%81+%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD).
Wikipedia has a nice reference to start off for searching of space agencies hoax videos (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government_space_agencies#World_maps).
-
"chipsullivan, are you sure that russian space agencies being sincere too?"
Yes, thanks for double checking.
-
"I have not seen 1 not 1 real picture of earth from out of space, explain that to me?"
Okay, here's the explanation, you suck at finding photos on the internet. Clear enough?
It took me a bit more than 4 minutes to come up with this: http://www.russianspaceweb.com/images/spacecraft/application/weather/elektro/earth_disk1_1.jpg
Russian space agency, Roscosmos, not NASA.
"... there isn't 1 real picture of the earth, planets, the moon, or the sun; absolutely nothing."
That's pretty extreme. Are you literally claiming that no one, in all of history, has ever taken a picture of the moon? I must augment my previous statement, you suck at understanding simple, everyday occurrences that no one else has any trouble with.
I am just an amateur "picture taker", but I have taken a lot of pictures of the moon. But the stars don't show up because :
I set the shutter speed to a fraction of a second for the brightness of the moon.
If I had wanted to take a picture of the stars I would have had to take a long time exposure - maybe even an hour or more. There are "star trails" pictures which took several hours.
Would you say they're not real ?
It is all a matter of exposure of the rating of the film or the digital camera equivalent setting. It's just a matter of exposure, which has been explained time after time on these forums.
If I set the shutter speed (say 1/100 second) and the lens aperture ( "f stop", say f8) to get a picture of the moon correctly exposed, the stars, being much dimmer, will be underexposed and will not show in the picture.
I'm just using these figures for examples. The actual settings might be different.
If I change the settings for correctly exposing the stars (say several minutes time exposure at f 2) the stars will be correctly exposed, but the moon will be overexposed and show up in the picture as a bright blob.
This is just an example of the problems of taking pictures of the moon and the stars.
Some more advanced amateur or professional photographer should be able to give you more accurate examples of shutter speeds and f stops.
Are you saying that pictures of the moon taken by amateur photographers aren't real ? Also if all the pictures taken by the astronomical observatories of the moon, the suns, the stars, the planets and all the other objects in the sky aren't real ?
Are YOU really real ?
Are you really smarter than a Fifth Grader ?
Here are two suggestions for Flat Earthers :
(1) If Flat Earthers would like to learn about taking pictures of the moon, etc.:
Visit an astronomical observatory and ask questions. Go on one of their "Star Parties" and ask questions.
(2) If Flat Earthers would like to learn if the earth was flat or round.:
Join the Navy and ask questions.
One of my old teachers told me : "The only dumb question is the one you don't ask."
As for the Navy, I don't know how many times I heard that......Starting in Boot Camp !
-
Just an observation and one of my big "IMHO's".
If a flat earther doesn't know something about a subject, it's a lie and he isn't interested in learning about it.
-
chipsullivan, are you sure that russian space agencies being sincere too?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ra1vTToMir4
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/images/spacecraft/application/weather/elektro/earth_disk1_1.jpg
The picture you've given is just a CGI rendering, obviously!
I've found two big channels dedicated to debunking Roscosmos/NASA/ISS:
TMStudio (https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=tm+studio+%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%81), Макс Беляев (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4S16PX0flDyyRN5qgLmp9KK8mF_V_YsO)
Watch one of the videos in the search results (https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=EgIIBVAU&q=%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%81+%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD).
Wikipedia has a nice reference to start off for searching of space agencies hoax videos (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government_space_agencies#World_maps).
What information do you have to prove these images are "cgi rendering"?
Also, if you have a specific organization that is "dedicated" to proving something, usually that thing they are trying to prove is false. Reality doesn't require that kind of effort to prove.
And before you try to claim NASA is trying to prove the earth is round, I will answer that for you preemptively:
No..they are not. They don't have to prove the earth is round because it is, and their mission is not to prove anything, but to study and gather information. Information that you yourself can also gather and study.
-
Smokified, thanks for your reply.
What information do you have to prove these images are "cgi rendering"?
I know it sounds completely stupid as an argument, but... I looked at that picture and felt internally the fakeness, computer-rendered fakeness. If it was real, i would intuitively feel it's real. "Intuition almost never lies. But you need to discern whether you're actually listening to intuition or not".
And before you try to claim NASA is trying to prove the earth is round, I will answer that for you preemptively:
I didn't even want to do that, because i myself know, that Nasa is just a space agency. And space agencies are all in lying game for at least 2 things:
the space is different than we've been willingfully/unwillingfully brainwashed with,
the sun is small and local/at varying heights(maybe there are multiple suns?! (https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=two+suns+-song+-mix+-music+-flare+-bowling+-basketball%2C+week) - not 100% sure about it though; the moon is local too!).
-
Smokified, thanks for your reply.
What information do you have to prove these images are "cgi rendering"?
I know it sounds completely stupid as an argument, but... I looked at that picture and felt internally the fakeness, computer-rendered fakeness. If it was real, i would intuitively feel it's real. "Intuition almost never lies. But you need to discern whether you're actually listening to intuition or not".
And before you try to claim NASA is trying to prove the earth is round, I will answer that for you preemptively:
I didn't even want to do that, because i myself know, that Nasa is just a space agency. And space agencies are all in lying game for at least 2 things:
the space is different than we've been willingfully/unwillingfully brainwashed with,
the sun is small and local/at varying heights(maybe there are multiple suns?! (https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=two+suns+-song+-mix+-music+-flare+-bowling+-basketball%2C+week) - not 100% sure about it though; the moon is local too!).
NASA is not the only space agency in the world. How about all the other countries ?
-
Smokified, thanks for your reply.
What information do you have to prove these images are "cgi rendering"?
I know it sounds completely stupid as an argument, but... I looked at that picture and felt internally the fakeness, computer-rendered fakeness. If it was real, i would intuitively feel it's real. "Intuition almost never lies. But you need to discern whether you're actually listening to intuition or not".
And before you try to claim NASA is trying to prove the earth is round, I will answer that for you preemptively:
I didn't even want to do that, because i myself know, that Nasa is just a space agency. And space agencies are all in lying game for at least 2 things:
the space is different than we've been willingfully/unwillingfully brainwashed with,
the sun is small and local/at varying heights(maybe there are multiple suns?! (https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=two+suns+-song+-mix+-music+-flare+-bowling+-basketball%2C+week) - not 100% sure about it though; the moon is local too!).
Have you ever heard about Amateur Radio "Moon Bounce" measurements of the distance from the earth to the moon using radio waves ? Are they lying ?
Have you ever heard about the measurements of the distance from the earth to the moon by astronomical observatories using laser beams ? Are they lying ?
How do you know about the distance from the earth to the moon ?
How do you know the space agencies are lying ?
What is it about space that you know how it is different ?
Are you smarter than a Fifth Grader ?
-
"chipsullivan, are you sure that russian space agencies being sincere too?"
Yes, thanks for double checking.
Please refrain from low-content posting in the upper fora.
-
geckothegeek,
Are you smarter than a Fifth Grader ?
Are you trying to insult me just because i question paradigm you beleive in?
What is it about space that you know how it is different ?
A lot of videos (https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=stars+amateur+footage) and my mild personal experience of color-changing, shapeshifting stars (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI5HsEWjZPM).
Are they lying ?
Every space-related press-release needs to be analyzed deeply multiple times!
Quote from: RebelWithoutaPause (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuMYw6FIK7mKHrPBGp5_q8A/videos) on January 9, 2017, unknown PM
either the sun is a lot closer the we are told , or the clouds are 93 Million miles away.
-
What makes FET fail - is things like the observations that any human can make for themselves, very easily, just looking at the Sun and Moon and spending a few minutes thinking carefully about what they see.
FET fails on so many levels, so many issues, so many facts... When you take into account the "chain reaction" a given denial or assertion causes, for instance, the sun being a ball of light, a flashlight... Just think of how many other facts, observations, plain phenomenon of reality this contradicts with in a chain, you can easily say that the FET needs to rewrite, remodel, reset literally hundreds of thousands of facts, and not all them related to astronomy, to even try to stay afloat. What do I mean by "chain reaction"? Well, lets think, why is the sun depicted as a small ball of light that acts like a flashlight? To be able to explain day and night on a FET, thats why. Funny, yes?
OTOH, I DO understand the flatters. I too am scared and bewildered when I think of space, when I think of the sun so large that it can contain 1.3 MILLION earths... That the biggest known sun, Canis Majoris, can contain 6.9 BILLION of our suns. etc. The utter insignificance of human existence is mind boggling in the light of these facts. What the subatomic particle is to us, we are to the universe... Gives me panic attacks. And the fact that we are able to COMPREHEND this and we still die away into nothingness is another cruel fact that I have not encountered any words in any human language to describe how cruel.
So the FET does give some solace, does open up a possibility to the human where it is being treated a special existence. No dark, ever expanding gigantic unfreindly universe in FET. It's human centric. And quite cosy with the wall surrounding the oceans etc.
And it's perfect movie material. But I digress...
-
"FET needs to rewrite, remodel, reset literally hundreds of thousands of facts, and not all them related to astronomy"
Yes for instance FET needs to deny the existence of such flights:
https://www.skyscanner.net/transport/flights/syd/scl/cheap-flights-from-sydney-kingsford-smith-to-santiago-arturo-merino-benitez.html?adults=1&children=0&infants=0&cabinclass=economy&preferdirects=false&rtn=0&outboundaltsenabled=false&inboundaltsenabled=false&oym=1708&selectedoday=11
Since according to the FET map, no plane would be able to carry enough juice to traverse such a distance. (FETist: NASA fuels those planes midair to keep up the illusion)
And it would take about 118 hours to traverse that distance! (FETist: Those flights don't exist. It's a lie, hoax, fake news, covfefe!)
-
I recently started searching about FE, and i am truly in doubt.
Thats great,
NASA are their own worst enemies, the fact that thousands of the early moon landing tapes conveniently were erased shows that NASA fears scrutiny. If anyone still believes that the moon landings actually happened, then they are living in "911 was done by terrorists" la la land, and thats exactly where NASA and the government want them.
Regardless of the shape of the earth, when Roundies start defending the undefendable without questioning any of the numerous air bubbles, cgi gaffes, and in 911's case, controlled demolition evidence, then its a sure sign that they are a part of the deception so be careful on here.
The FES is its own worst enemy.
And the earth was known to be a globe long before NASA came into being.